Arkansas Blog

The "prescription drugs" that school officials strip searched a 13 year old girl were looking for were 400 mg Advil pills.

Clarence Thomas thought strip searches by school officials is just fine!!

"Preservation of order, discipline and safety in public schools is simply not the domain of the Constitution," he said. "And, common sense is not a judicial monopoly or a constitutional imperative.

(Clarence Thomas is a very damaged human being but he is still a Cancer in the body of American Jurisprudence.

My youngest daughter just called from Disney Land and said that Farrah Faucet has died. RIP Farrah....still have your posters in the attic, but it's too damn hot today to go look for them.

Clarence "Long Dong Silver" Thomas was probably distracted during the court proceedings, imagining himself as the school official doing the strip search of the 13 year old girl, and couldn't see anything wrong with that.

>>In fact, no pills were found on Savana when her underwear was examined by two school officials, both women, who were acting on a tip passed along by another student.<<

How much longer until complete body cavity searches begin? Maybe they have, what do I know.

With the court holding school officials harmless for damages what's to keep the next pinhead dictator posing as an assistant school principal from going up their young asses?

Judge Thomas sounds a lot like Judge Sotomayer when it comes to schools. Nothing is to come between the school district's right to retain order.

So schools are just another protective corporate shell... where actual people are not responsible for anything, even stripping down little girls?

eLwood "With the court holding school officials harmless for damages what's to keep the next pinhead dictator posing as an assistant school principal from going up their young asses?"

Two things about the decision - 1) The School District was still on the line in this case. 2) The decision held the individual actors to be protected by qualified immunity because at the time that they did this, it was not clear that the student's 4rth Amendment Rights would apply. From here on out, this is a clearly established right and the qualified immunity would be much much harder to justify. The problem is that despite what may seem to many to be common sense that such a protection would be clear, there was a circuit split on the extent of the TLO case in student privacy with respect to "strip searches" and their justifications.

The dissenters about holding the individuals liable looked at things beyond just the search, and the general "abuse of authority." That is why only 2 of the 9 signed on there.

So, to answer your question directly - This very opinion prevents it.